Australia Australia - William Tyrrell Disappeared While Playing in Yard, Kendall (NSW), Sept 2014 #76

[SouthAussie]

I very much doubt that they could considering they had lost their parental rights. If they were to sue anyone it would be FACS (or whatever they are called these days).

They also would have to prove negligence, in the legal definition of negligence, and on the balance of probability.

Did FACS/the FP do anything that a 'reasonable person' wouldn't do?

 

[iiiii's]

I think Peter O"Brien explains the flaws in more detail.

"The fact that police - who are the usual authority in the charging process - have not arrested or charged the foster mum in relation to Tyrrell's disappearance is very telling"

All the police could legitimately go after BS for was the unrelated alleged child sex offences.
All the police have legitimately gone after the FM for are the unrelated varied offences.

Peter O'Brien is drawing a parallel. imo
.

BBM


Police did not have legitimate cause to go after BS for unrelated CSA's. It was deemed a malicious prosecution by the judge who oversaw the case which the lead detective tried to connect to WT's disappearance, which the judge found was spearheaded by GJ's leadership.

The police have recommended in their brief that the DPP lay charges against the FFC for perverting the course of justice and tampering with a corpse, both directly related to WT's disappearance. And we don't know the basis for that recommendation nor the DPP's view as yet.

 

[SouthAussie]

BBM


Police did not have legitimate cause to go after BS for unrelated CSA's. It was deemed a malicious prosecution by the judge who oversaw the case which the lead detective tried to connect to WT's disappearance, which the judge found was spearheaded by GJ's leadership.

The police have recommended in their brief that the DPP lay charges against the FFC for perverting the course of justice and tampering with a corpse, both directly related to WT's disappearance. And we don't know the basis for that recommendation nor the DPP's view as yet.

The point people are making is that the police are well within their power to charge right now - if they had enough evidence.

 

[k-mac]

The point people are making is that the police are well within their power to charge right now - if they had enough evidence.

But they are well within their rights and smarts to wait.
The clock doesn't start ticking till charges.


There is no urgency to get this done.

The only importance....is to get it right.

 

[iiiii's]

The point people are making is that the police are well within their power to charge right now - if they had enough evidence.

I like the tactic the police are using via the DPP. If the police charge her she will shut up. Possibly through the coroner a few more options may play out and it will all be in the FFC's hans if she wants to co-operate, meaning keep telling the truth about what happened and be cross examined on her testimony which might actually have a chance of furthering WT's investigation if she is not involved and she would be compelled to give evidence, she could lie and be open to perjury or she could seek a certificate on the grounds of being a suspect, a status she would be imposing upon herself or she might end up making a confession. Also if there are flaw or grey areas in the evidence police have and the DPP has written a brief on that, the questioning at the inquest of herself and others I feel would be a lot more focused and nuanced to possibly fill in those areas. It's a good tactic. IMO

 

[k-mac]

I like the tactic the police are using via the DPP.

I am liking it too.

They are extracting information and applying maximum pressure.

For free.

Brilliant police tactics under trying circumstances within a botched case.

 

[JLZ]

I like the tactic the police are using via the DPP. If the police charge her she will shut up. Possibly through the coroner a few more options may play out and it will all be in the FFC's hans if she wants to co-operate, meaning keep telling the truth about what happened and be cross examined on her testimony which might actually have a chance of furthering WT's investigation if she is not involved and she would be compelled to give evidence, she could lie and be open to perjury or she could seek a certificate on the grounds of being a suspect, a status she would be imposing upon herself or she might end up making a confession. Also if there are flaw or grey areas in the evidence police have and the DPP has written a brief on that, the questioning at the inquest of herself and others I feel would be a lot more focused and nuanced to possibly fill in those areas. It's a good tactic. IMO

Perhaps the police have held back some evidence from the DPP so that the DPP won't charge her and then the inquest will reopen and then FFC will be in the tricky situation you describe . . .

 

[iiiii's]

https://www.odpp.nsw.gov.au/prosecution-guidance/prosecution-guidelines
This is an interesting link. A priority in fielding cases through the DPP is "the public interest", as the DPP is acting on behalf of the community. There are many tests applied to the evidence, witnesses, victim/s, accused, and a range of other factors. If the DPP chose not to prosecute, there is still the coronial inquest and if the police still come to the same conclusion from their investigation after all those processes, then I guess they can charge the FFC themselves. It's going to be a long haul I think unless any of these other departments see things the same way as SFR.

 

[SouthAussie]

https://www.odpp.nsw.gov.au/prosecution-guidance/prosecution-guidelines
This is an interesting link. A priority in fielding cases through the DPP is "the public interest", as the DPP is acting on behalf of the community. There are many tests applied to the evidence, witnesses, victim/s, accused, and a range of other factors. If the DPP chose not to prosecute, there is still the coronial inquest and if the police still come to the same conclusion from their investigation after all those processes, then I guess they can charge the FFC themselves. It's going to be a long haul I think unless any of these other departments see things the same way as SFR.

What public interest means is not how much the public is interested in the case, if that is what you are saying.
It is more about if it is in the public interest (safety) to get the accused off the streets. imo


The public interest does not mean those things or cases in which the public are interested. Nor is it, necessarily, the public’s view or opinion on whether a prosecution should progress. Link

..... one’s decision cannot be driven by sympathy, prejudices, public sentiment or a talk show host’s opinion or a poll but by prosecutorial ethics, fairness and courage. DPP Public Interest


The public interest factors to be considered will vary from case to case, but may include:

• whether the offence is serious or trivial;
• any mitigating or aggravating circumstances;
• the youth, age, intelligence, physical health, mental health or special vulnerability of the alleged offender, witness or victim;
• the alleged offender’s antecedents and background;
• the passage of time since the alleged offence;
• the availability and efficacy of any alternatives to prosecution;
• the prevalence of the alleged offence and the need for general and personal deterrence;
• the attitude of the victim;
• the need to give effect to regulatory or punitive imperatives; and
• the likely outcome in the event of a finding of guilt.

CDPP Prosecution Policy

 

[Warshawski]

I also wonder why Williams biological parents have not sued the Foster Parents?

Can a Parent Sue Me as a Babysitter?

I'll explain why parents may sue you as a babysitter, what they have to prove to win their case, and more.

kidsit.com

<modsnip: Removed opinion stated as fact>

I think it’s too early for that to occur.

 

[Warshawski]

The point people are making is that the police are well within their power to charge right now - if they had enough evidence.

Hi SA, I’m no expert but it’s my belief that the role of the DPP is to review a case & to make a judgement as to whether there definitely is sufficient evidence to prosecute that case.

Given the rather previous farcical behaviours in this very sad situation -
the charges against BS,
the ensuing very public court appearances,
the result of that
and now there’s an Appeal
(also there’s been the suggestion of a couple of other related large payouts) what is the Cost of all that - while people are homeless. …

I personally find all that an embarrassment, particularly to those who occupy the Levels that we empower & place our trust in.

Furthermore, as a Taxpayer I want my hard earned $$ to be respectfully & considerately applied, so I’m pleased to know that the fresh eyes of the DPP will review the gathered evidence.

Surely for anyone in the ‘firing line’ it’d also reassuring to have that ‘moment of prevailed sanity’ before ……

While I’m on a role, I’ll throw out another ‘IMO‘ which is in relation to the suggestions that the giving of files to DPP was a ’deliberate leak’ by William’s Police Investigation Team - I trust my gut & don’t believe that to be the case.

IMO the perceived threat from the DPP of how hard it would come down on any such frivolous use of its ‘hierarchical standing’ rules it out for me immediately.

However, I’m willing to consider the intervention to Media of a ‘lone gunman’, who could be on either side.

Sad sad occurrence in NZ today. .. Thankfully my ANZ colleagues are ok, but still another situation of grief & stress … and questions to be answered.

 

[SouthAussie]

Hi SA, I’m no expert but it’s my belief that the role of the DPP is to review a case & to make a judgement as to whether there definitely is sufficient evidence to prosecute that case.

Given the rather previous farcical behaviours in this very sad situation -
the charges against BS,
the ensuing very public court appearances,
the result of that
and now there’s an Appeal
(also there’s been the suggestion of a couple of other related large payouts) what is the Cost of all that - while people are homeless. …

I personally find all that an embarrassment, particularly to those who occupy the Levels that we empower & place our trust in.

Furthermore, as a Taxpayer I want my hard earned $$ to be respectfully & considerately applied, so I’m pleased to know that the fresh eyes of the DPP will review the gathered evidence.

Surely for anyone in the ‘firing line’ it’d also reassuring to have that ‘moment of prevailed sanity’ before ……

While I’m on a role, I’ll throw out another ‘IMO‘ which is in relation to the suggestions that the giving of files to DPP was a ’deliberate leak’ by William’s Police Investigation Team - I trust my gut & don’t believe that to be the case.

IMO the perceived threat from the DPP of how hard it would come down on any such frivolous use of its ‘hierarchical standing’ rules it out for me immediately.

However, I’m willing to consider the intervention to Media of a ‘lone gunman’, who could be on either side.

Sad sad occurrence in NZ today. .. Thankfully my ANZ colleagues are ok, but still another situation of grief & stress … and questions to be answered.

Remembering, of course, that the DPP were the ones who prosecuted BS.
Now that some/many of us have read up on how the DPP makes its decision to prosecute, BS' historical case clearly must have fit into the prosecution guidelines.

imo

 

[bearbear]

fc dv hearing august 11 parramatta court 9.30 am
no name suppression

Online Registry - Landing Page

onlineregistry.lawlink.nsw.gov.au

 

[Couldbe]

Remembering, of course, that the DPP were the ones who prosecuted BS.
Now that some/many of us have read up on how the DPP makes its decision to prosecute, BS' historical case clearly must have fit into the prosecution guidelines.

imo

Thu 1 Dec 2022 Bill Spedding: former suspect in William Tyrrell’s disappearance awarded $1.5m in damages underlined & BBM -
"Clear evidence emerged that the complainants had been coached by another person to make allegations and another person’s evidence undermined the case, Harrison heard.

In March 2018, Spedding was found not guilty.

Spedding said he was charged for crimes he did not commit, all to further the police prosecution of him as a suspect in William’s disappearance.”

JMO -……….. The charges were allegedly the result of investigations by the lead detective who investigating William’s disappearance at the time…..

On 3 May 2022 https://www.9newinvestigations s.com.au/national/former-lead-detective-gary-jubelin-in-tyrrell-probe-denies-charging-bill-spedding-to-pressure-him-during-investigation/fe5963ea-7dad-4dc9-a999-130ccfeec5cc underlined & BBM
“The former lead detective on the William Tyrrell disappearance case has strongly denied any suggestion that charges against Bill Spedding were part of a police plan to pressure him.:

 

[SouthAussie]

Thu 1 Dec 2022 Bill Spedding: former suspect in William Tyrrell’s disappearance awarded $1.5m in damages underlined & BBM -
"Clear evidence emerged that the complainants had been coached by another person to make allegations and another person’s evidence undermined the case, Harrison heard.

In March 2018, Spedding was found not guilty.

Spedding said he was charged for crimes he did not commit, all to further the police prosecution of him as a suspect in William’s disappearance.”

JMO -……….. The charges were allegedly the result of investigations by the lead detective who investigating William’s disappearance at the time…..

On 3 May 2022 https://www.9newinvestigations s.com.au/national/former-lead-detective-gary-jubelin-in-tyrrell-probe-denies-charging-bill-spedding-to-pressure-him-during-investigation/fe5963ea-7dad-4dc9-a999-130ccfeec5cc underlined & BBM
“The former lead detective on the William Tyrrell disappearance case has strongly denied any suggestion that charges against Bill Spedding were part of a police plan to pressure him.:

The point being that the DPP does not prosecute unless it thinks it has a winnable case.
Sure, they lost, but the case obviously fit their prosecution guidelines.

https://www.odpp.nsw.gov.au/prosecution-guidance/prosecution-guidelines

 

[JBowie]

Thu 1 Dec 2022 Bill Spedding: former suspect in William Tyrrell’s disappearance awarded $1.5m in damages underlined & BBM -
"Clear evidence emerged that the complainants had been coached by another person to make allegations and another person’s evidence undermined the case, Harrison heard.

IIRC, the allegation was that his ex-wife's family were behind that. Her brother (his ex brother in law) Jeffrey John Hillsley is a notorious pedophile and murderer.

https://www.news.com.au/national/courts-law/bill-speddings-former-brotherinlaw-is-a-murderer-and-child-rapist/news-story/337c425719459e0642120e517dd4cef4

 

[Couldbe]

IIRC, the allegation was that his ex-wife's family were behind that. Her brother (his ex brother in law) Jeffrey John Hillsley is a notorious pedophile and murderer.

https://www.news.com.au/national/courts-law/bill-speddings-former-brotherinlaw-is-a-murderer-and-child-rapist/news-story/337c425719459e0642120e517dd4cef4

"The state of NSW denied these allegations during the trial, saying police had not acted maliciously but that misunderstandings had occurred."

Bill Spedding: former suspect in William Tyrrell’s disappearance awarded $1.5m in damages

NSW ordered to pay damages after police maliciously pursued Spedding while investigating Tyrrell’s disappearance in September 2014

www.theguardian.com

 

[SouthAussie]

IIRC, the allegation was that his ex-wife's family were behind that. Her brother (his ex brother in law) Jeffrey John Hillsley is a notorious pedophile and murderer.

https://www.news.com.au/national/courts-law/bill-speddings-former-brotherinlaw-is-a-murderer-and-child-rapist/news-story/337c425719459e0642120e517dd4cef4

I will always wonder about the Victorian charges. They involved multiple children, but only one of the children from the NSW case. But the case will probably never be heard due to the prosecution needing that tendency evidence.

 

[k-mac]

Did FACS/the FP do anything that a 'reasonable person' wouldn't do?

Have never kicked a child in my lifetime.

Is that a reasonable thing to do??
Is it reasonable to make dismissive statements around this child's allegations.
When there is recorded evidence?
I don't think so , neither does NSW police thankfully.

The actions of the FPs before and after Williams disappearance are ugly.

William Tyrrell’s foster mother denied mental health application over alleged assault of young girl

Magistrate dismisses application for woman’s charges of assault and intimidation to be dealt with under Mental Health Act

www.theguardian.com

SD allegedly told a treating psychologist that she kicked the girl because she believed she was about to kick another child, but the alleged victim denied this.

The court heard SD allegedly verbally abused the child over a sustained period of time.

In a telephone conversation SD allegedly told her friend: “I need to break her.”

Then the... stalking and intimidation.

Malingering with a judge about your mental health status is shady.

NO, have to disagree there with your statement.....not actions of this "reasonable person". Or any reasonable person I know to be honest.



moo

 

[SouthAussie]

Have never kicked a child in my lifetime.

NO, have to disagree there with your statement.....not actions of this "reasonable person". Or any reasonable person I know to be honest.

I thought Detective Willy was speaking of William's disappearance when they said ... "I also wonder why Williams biological parents have not sued the Foster Parents?"

I did not relate that question to the alleged assault. Thanks for that.